Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Or we could regulate the market to not allow monopolies (and break up large businesses). We have laws for this, they're just not enforced.


sort by: page size:

seems more of a problem that we let monopoloies exist. hell even oligopolies. we do have laws but we all know they don't do shit.

Exactly. Monopolies ought to be regulated to ensure a free market.

regulation creates monopolies.

We need a regulation that will automatically deal with such monopolies by ordering companies to split after reaching certain thresholds. This way we would never get companies too big to fail.

Here's some ways I can think of that would allow competition without splitting the company up. Forced Ip sharing, incentivised loans to fund new competitors, ip sunsetting, fab sharing, etc, etc. Everyone dislikes government intervention in business, yet something must be done, so I'd like to see the current evil vs the calculated result of the least evil of the government interventions, and vote for one. If monopolies are illegal, and this is a monopoly...

Yes, that's why we have laws to promote healthy free-market competition over monopolies.

You think they should not be able to regulate monopolies? The free market only works with regulation or else we end up back in the 1800s Trust era where a few people owned all the industries and you couldn't get your shipments transported on rail lines owned by someone with a competing business interest.

Uh, regulation often prevents monopolies. See: anti-trust regulation.

If big is the problem than maybe we should break these monopolies up.

Regulate monopolies.

The problem with monopolies is they can easily purchase serious competitors. That is why we need the government to regulate these companies and spur competition.

Maybe we need oligopoly laws in addition to monopoly laws.

So I can just claim that none of the things that cause monopolies are regulation, then regulations don't cause monopolies?

Please explain, how do you get an efficient market without monopolies if you don't have anti-trust regulation?

This might work if we had government policy allowing for competition. Instead we prop up existing monopolies and prevent competition from springing up when the incumbent interests lobby (read: bribe) accordingly.

Breaking monopolies is a form of regulation

For a market that's so large, there are very few players involved. More than likely several illegal monopolies have formed. We already have laws that are meant to address this issue. We should probably just enforce those.

Instead of more regulation, I wish they'd just break them up. I'd prefer to have less regulation and no monopolies, then a bunch of regulation and monopolies.

The problem is that Government hasn't enforced Anti-Trust Laws since 1970. Things are more deregulated but the only companies that can compete are already part of the Fascist state. Do you remember when you had more than 10 choices for Internet? Breaking up monopolies should be a primary function of the US Government. Now it encourages them.
next

Legal | privacy